Steve Goddard tips me to this article in the Canberra Times on May 16th, 1974:
SUPPORT FOR A THEORY OF A COOLING WORLD
It has some interesting claims in it that sound much like climate change claims made today. Apparently they detected large albedo changes via satellite, with a 12% increase in snow and ice in the Northern Hemisphere that started in 1971, and continued through 1974 when this article was published:
Click to enlarge. Source: http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/page/12217427?zoomLevel=1
They claim that due to albedo changes which help induce cooling, wind, drought, and rainfall patterns will become worse, much like identical claims made today about the effects of warming. The article also claims, quoting Dr. Reid Bryson, there would be increased uncertainty about “stable patterns of weather” that may affect “food reserves”, and he also claimed “much of that change was man-made”. Sound familiar?
The news article is based on a paper by George J. Kukla, and Helena J. Kukla of the Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory of Columbia University.
Increased Surface Albedo in the Northern Hemisphere
Did satellites warn of the weather troubles of 1972 and 1973?
Science 22 February 1974: Vol. 183 no. 4126 pp. 709-714 DOI: 10.1126/science.183.4126.709
Routine mapping of snow and ice fields in the northern hemisphere was started by NOAA in 1967. Large year-to-year variations of the snow and pack-ice covers were observed. The annual mean coverage increased by 12 percent during 1971 and has remained high. The index R, which shows the approximate amount of energy reflected from the surface by snow and ice under the mean cloudiness, increased correspondingly. Thus, if the cloud cover over the snow fields did not increase substantially, the anomalous weather patterns of 1972 and 1973 could have been connected with the deficit in surface heat exchange which originated in the northern hemisphere the year before. During the past 7 years the largest changes occurred in the fall and in the continental interiors of Asia and America (8).
Two synoptic parameters which could readily provide information on the development of snow and ice cover in the northern hemisphere are (i) the total area momentarily covered and (ii) the running annual mean of snow and ice coverage for the preceding 1-year period. By 20 September 1973 the annual mean coverage was 37.3 x 106 km2, 11 to 12 percent higher than at the same time during 1968 through 1970. Snow cover-fall, the season when 15 x 106 to 55 x 106 km2 of the northern hemisphere is covered with snow and ice, started on 20 September 1973, compared to 17 September 1972 and 5 or 10 October during 1967 through 1970.
The links between the atmosphere, the oceans, and the land surfaces must be better understood before the role of snow and ice can be thoroughly explained and exploited for long-range weather forecasting. But it is clear that snow, hitherto almost overlooked in synoptic meteorological reports, must be important in the mechanism of weather changes.
===============================================================
Back then, even the BBC was certain enough to bring in Dr. Kukla for an interview to explain how global cooling was a danger for the future.
And others were still talking about a coming ice age in 1977:
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Thank you. Good bit of news. As we see the solar sunspot minimum take affect, the winters should be longer, more severe to those 40 degrees North and South of the Equator towards the Polar Ice Caps. As already expressed by other experts, this will dig into crops and farm animal populations.
That’s the down side of this. Fewer buffets maybe.
Ah! The days of Gough Whitlam!!!
Well as the sun slows down and we go into a possible little ice age, they can recycle the alarm rhetoric from the 1970’s. Very sustainable.
The reality is that a cooling of 2C could dramatically effect the grain production of Russia and Canada and then we may well see a climate catastrophe.
And remember that Stephen Schneider told us that a cooler world would produce more variable weather….
“I have cited many examples of recent climatic variability and repeated the warnings of several well-known climatologists that a cooling effect has set in – perhaps one akin to the Little Ice Age – and that climatic variability, which is the bane of reliable food production, can be expected to increase along with the cooling”
Schneider was a global cooling advocate until it started warming up?
Oops sorry should have read the posts before posting.
This is what I remember. Cooling warnings in the 70s. But I must be mistaken, since I’ve been told by warmists that there was no such scare.
If anything, this should be a lesson for those who think we have enough information or a long enough record that we can predict the future. No trend continues, whether it’s up or down, and the real fear is cooling. In the 70s they were certain the cooling would continue.
Coincidentally, climate satellites were launched right when the cooling turned around to slight warming… causing the satellite record to initially show warming.
Amr mazouk: Maaate, I’ve tried to block those Dark Days out of my consciousness, but here you go and resurrect them! Whitlam days indeed. Unintended, but easily foreseen, consequences everywhere. Many similarities to Climate Chuckles.
There’s a feast of climate change disaster stories published in Australian newspapers since 1877 at http://www.waclimate.net/climate-history.html
Speaking of albedo, could anyone spot me their thoughts on this:
The last several years I have noticed something curious about the clouds in our region (southern Ontario), especially cumulus clouds- they have seemed much Brighter than I ever recall seeing. And I seem to recall reading something about cloud brightness some time back, playing a role in cooling (but I could be wrong).
This image is one I took some time back, which illustrates the point
http://kajm.deviantart.com/art/Gates-of-Heaven-266933579
In regards to the above article, Thanks! I am putting together a massive chunk of information about the Global Cooling ‘scare’ of the 70s, in one big article.
The main problem with either subject of cooling OR warming is that there has been no increase in severe weather, only an increase in the hype. Weather has actually been more stable based on actuall observations.
CodeTech
Show those who are deniers (Sorry) of the 70’s Global Cooling scare Anthony’s related link at the bottom of this article.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=105083&relatedposts_position=2qqq
Nader’s solution – form another CAGW group! antiwar dems at democracy resort to agreeing with DoD that CAGW is a threat to “national security” – you can’t make this stuff up:
12 March: Democracy Now: Nader on Senate’s Climate Stance
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Republicans dismissed the marathon session and called Democrats, quote, “alarmists.” This came as the U.S. Department of Defense released a new report Monday about the threat climate change impacts pose to national security…
RALPH NADER:…They went all night, led by Harry Reid and Senator Ed Markey in the U.S. Senate, making statements about the documentation for climate change, often called global warming, and the need for congressional action. But it’s got to go way beyond that. The Congress has been an immobile bubble in this whole swelling concern around the country, involving demonstrations and picketing and some lawsuits, but it hasn’t permeated Congress…
And the second point is this, that when you have very affluent people, like George Soros, Tom Steyer and Al Gore, who are really out front warning about climate change, when you have them, they’ve got to come and build a very powerful external lobby on Congress, where you have a hundred professional scientists, lawyers, organizers, public relations specialists descend on Congress every day in every member’s office, in the corridors, in the cafeterias, building a concern here…
And we’re going to ask some of these affluent environmentalists to ante up and start a brand new group, so that Congress is literally as overwhelmed by people on this issue as they have been overwhelmed by the drug industry or the real estate industry or the oil industry…
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/3/12/nader_on_senates_climate_stance_insanity
correction –
should have said “antiwar dems at democracy NOW resort”…
In 1287 AD, all hell broke loose in the Romney Marshes. There was a storm so fierce that the River Rother was diverted from its ancient course.
http://theromneymarsh.net/history/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romney_Marsh
Sixty three years later, along came the official beginning of the Little Ice Age in 1350 AD.
Look at the lists of great storms & great gales during the LIA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gale_(disambiguation)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gale_(disambiguation)
Ah, a trip down memory lane! The alarmists try as hard as they like but history cannot be errsed, not since the interweb anyway. Thanks Al Gore!
Usually the warmists get up in arms about this stuff, saying that there was no global cooling consensus in the 1970’s.
The point though is that there was global cooling consensus between 1972 and 1975 circa. Just not for the whole decade.
love how their mission is to get across the “right” information, not necessarily the correct information:
13 March: DailyNewsOnline NY: GO ART! presents climate change documentary
BATAVIA — The Genesee-Orleans Regional Arts Council will present “Comfort Zone,” a new feature-length documentary exploring the effects of climate change on upstate New York, at 3 p.m. Saturday, April 12, in the Conable Technology Building at Genesee Community College’s Batavia campus.
The film was produced and directed by upstate New York residents Kate Kressmann-Kehoe, Sean P. Donnelly and Batavia native David S. Danesh. The screening (67 minutes) will be followed by a Q&A with the filmmakers…
“There are a lot of things here we take for granted that could be gone, and it would be a very different place,” said co-producer Kressmann-Kehoe. The film highlights how New York residents’ daily lives will be affected, from winter sports to apple picking to gardening.
“If we take New York and we warm it up four degrees, that’s like moving it… to almost Virginia,” said Art DeGaetano, Professor of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University…
“I used to teach my students in introductory classes that when we had climate change issues, that these were things that could take hundreds of thousands of years. We now know from the ice core records that decade time scales can be involved, which changes everything,” said John Tarduno, Professor of Geophysics, University of Rochester.
Arming the community with the right information was a goal for the filmmakers.
“I want to see us do the right thing as a society and we are not going to do the right thing if we don’t have the right information,” Donnelly said…
“The threat to our way of life is huge. Everything we do is completely dominated by the use of fossil fuels. It’s pulling the rug out from under all of us,” said Rochester-based author Bob Siegel…
Despite the serious topic, the film has a light touch. Viewers are coming along on a journey of discovery with the filmmakers, not being lectured at or told what to do. Humorous animated sequences provide both information and relief. The film also explores deeper spiritual and psychological dimensions of society’s responses to the issue…
http://thedailynewsonline.com/entertainment/article_d102b78a-aa23-11e3-ae77-001a4bcf887a.html
Balmy and warm would be great. I know, let’s flood the atmosphere with one of them Greenhouse Gases! CO2 would be great, and it would fertilize the biosphere at the same time. Fire up the barbies!
Don’t give the Warmists any ideas. It would be trivial for them to switch the pea and claim AGC (anthropomorphic global cooling) and blame it on CO2. Remember, CO2 can do anything?
BrianH says
CO2 would be great, and it would fertilize the biosphere at the same time. Fire up the barbies!
henry says
That should be carbies?
Isn’t that quaint? They thought that “six consecutive years” was a trend! How naive. Real climastrologists now know that a trend needs at least 3 years more data than your opponents actually have.
Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter) says:
March 13, 2014 at 1:35 am
Have they shut down any coal fired power stations there?
Dr. Gifford Miller eh? When will he make up his mind eh?s
@Otter
e.g. we know antarctic ice is increasing
I also checked 10 weather stations in Alaska:
tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2ql5zq8&s=5#.UyGDtz-SxPI
It is cooling there at a rate of -0.55 degrees C per decade since 1998.
So we are currently cooling from the top [90] latitudes down,
You would not see much happening with temps. at the lower latitudes as here you will get more rain here due to (more) condensation and that releases energy.
You would notice the beginning of droughts at the higher latitudes.
I would imagine that you might see a change in cloud formation at the higher latitudes,
those are the bells ringing that the big drought is coming.
According to my calculations droughts on the Great Plains of America will start to get serious in 2021.
A new ice age is forecast! In the 1970s, not really!
‘…in the 1970s he writes, all the climate scientist believe an ice age is coming, but these are all popular newspapers, magazines and novels, not scientific journals…Time magazine isn’t peer reviewed, it’s just as capable of misreporting and sensationalising like any other magazine. Don’t just take my word for it, read the story and tell me where this claim of an ice age comes from…’
As you can see here:-
Meh… was not peer reviewed.
“The news article is based on a paper by George J. Kukla, and Helena J. Kukla of the Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory of Columbia University.”
Were Fran and Ollie uncredited co-authors?
In 1974, the White House was so concerned about the deterioration in climate, that they wet up a special Sub-Committee on climate change.
I have copies from NOAA of the original memos and the first report.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/feds-alarmed-by-global-cooling-in-1974/
Don’t let anyone tell you that it was all just media hype.
Sience digest 1973 “Brace yourself for ice age,
ewsweek 1975 “the cooling world”
1974 ” the weather machine”
1971 schnieder and Hansen…..to name a few
The President’s current scientific advisor Dr. John Holdren also predicted a looming ice age in a book from 1971 where he blamed man’s pollution. Ehrlich also chimes in apparently.
Then we had Kukla writing to the president.
Then we had President Nixon.
Dr. George Kukla is still unrepentant and says that ice ages start with global warming!
Here is a reminder of all the other folks predicting an ice age / cooling world in the 1970s.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/
Who were the skeptics back then and what did they have to say?
Past data shows the worst weather during periods of cold.
Ad hominems are seldom appropriate, but climatologists have earned a reputation for being slippery and unrepentant. Nothing ever falsifies their theories (beliefs). They claimed the world was catastrophically cooling before it was catastrophically warming but now, catastrophic warming (that ended 17+ years ago) may be a prelude to the next ice age. They have no shame. They’re never wrong. These people are not scientists. The term “climate whore” truly seems more appropriate.
Global climate is much less stable – with greater variability – during cold glacial periods than during warmer interglacials. Due to the fractality of the chaotic-nonlinear climate system, such a difference is likely at shorter timescales also. Higher variability during cooling/ cold periods, lower during warm.
One more reason why the CAGW diatribe, including weather wierding and now every single climate fluctuation of any kind being a harbinger of AGW doom, is nonsense in every possible way.
Ah! The Canberra Crimes – my old home town newpaper, still peddling the socialist line.
John
Thanks Jimbo!
”the present world cooling trend—a total of about .2°C in the world mean surface temperature over the past quarter century.” — 1971 – John Holdren
Where’d the trend go?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1946/to:1971/plot/gistemp/from:1946/to:1971/trend/plot/gistemp-dts/from:1946/to:1971/plot/gistemp-dts/from:1946/to:1971/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1946/to:1971/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1946/to:1971/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1946/to:1971/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1946/to:1971/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1946/to:1971/trend
This is why no analysis reliant on the data is credible.
Epiphany! The birth of the new ambulance chasers: Climate Scientists! It doesn’t matter if the change is up, down, or stable. It is a man made disaster and we must reverse it!
Anthony,
“Routine mapping of snow and ice fields in the northern hemisphere was started by NOAA in 1967.”
OK, so why do we get no data from this mapping until the satellites went up in 1979? Seems like valuable information…
I am not sure if it was mentioned here at WUWT or another website but the 1982 Sci-Fi novel, “The Sixth Winter” by John Gribin & Douglas Orgill, used the hypothesis of increased polar albedo causing the nearly rapid onset of an Ice Age as the basis of the story. A fast and entertaining read for those interested and it is available for Kindle. After reading the novel, all I can say is I hope that hypothesis is wrong!
Slightly OT and also from Steve Goddard;
Coast Guard warns of bad ice year for Atlantic Canada ships
The Canadian Coast Guard is pleading with merchant ships to plan their voyages well in advance this year as the organization’s icebreaker fleet confronts some of the worst ice conditions on the Atlantic Ocean in decades.
“Plan your voyage and we’ll all get through this,” said Mike Voight, the Atlantic region’s director of programs. “We’ve got a pretty bad or challenging ice year.”
The Canadian Ice Service, an arm of Environment Canada, said there is 10 per cent more ice this year compared to the 30-year average.
“We probably haven’t seen a winter this bad as far as ice for the past 25 years,” said Voight, referring to both the amount and thickness of the ice.
He said the Gulf of St. Lawrence is covered and some areas are “quite severe.”
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/coast-guard-warns-bad-ice-atlantic-canada-ships-173704122.html
Even in the 1970s they were concerned about extreme weather.
John West:
Excellent point. This should be brought up again and again.
Someone in the US Congress should initiate hearings on data tampering of the temperature series starting from the early 20th Century. They could call in John Holdren himself as a witness to testify on that “0.2°C cooling trend in the world mean surface temperature” from the mid-1940s to the early 1970s.
I’m sure you could sell Pay Per View to catch that testimony live.
Kurt in Switzerland
Dear Otter
Please forgive my impertinence but having looked at your photo I think most of the “cloud” is black, dirty, carbon-ridden smoke……Look at the dark bits….
There….got you sussed mate….
Do I really really need to put a “sarc” on this?
co2ers thinking long term now with 2000 year timelines
“according to a new study, published today, 5 March, in IOP Publishing’s journal Environmental Research Letters, that has calculated the temperature increases at which the 720 sites currently on the list of UNESCO World Heritage sites would be impacted by subsequent sea-level rises.
The Statue of Liberty, Independence Hall, Tower of London and Sydney Opera House are among the 136 sites that would be impacted if the current global warming trend continues and temperatures rise to 3°C above pre-industrial levels in the next 2000 years—a likely and not particularly extreme scenario, according to the researchers.
Also impacted would be the city centres of Brugge, Naples, Riga and St. Petersburg; Venice and its Lagoon; Robben Island; and Westminster Abbey.”
http://phys.org/news/2014-03-sea-level-threatens-unesco-world-heritage.html
the media love a good disaster movie story. it doesn’t even have to make sense? or even be probably. Just so someone says it they can report it. Which is why they endlessly print them.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0894213/?ref_=tt_ep_ep20
Above link to episode of “In Search of” about “The Coming Ice Age” with cast list that includes Dr. Stephen Schneider. It was during 1978.
“Apparently they detected large albedo changes via satellite, with a 12% increase in snow and ice in the Northern Hemisphere that started in 1971, and continued through 1974 when this article was published.”
Indeed. And there was substantial cooling: Part of the 1970s had 0.8 degrees Celsius lower average Northern Hemisphere temperature than the late 1930s high in a plot published in a 1976 National Geographic. That is not a typo, as alien as it may seem if anyone has only seen CRU / Hansen / ilk electronic hockey stick plots rewritten later implying the global cooling scare happened magically for no reason, like those on the WUWT reference page. The 1976 plot is illustrated about 40% of the way down within http://img213.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=62356_expanded_overview3_122_1094lo.jpg which illustrates the actual double peak history of the past century of temperature (and solar activity). When the next LIA begins, albedo change by rising snow/ice cover will amplify the albedo change in cloud cover. Meanwhile then, the increased temperature gradient between colder-still high latitudes and the little-changing tropics will drive extra storm activity in mid latitudes, as a study found looking at how proxies for how the last LIA compared to the MWP. The CAGW movement recycled the global cooling harm predictions in large part, but the difference is that the [latter] had more of a honest basis.
Typo in last sentence above: latter, not later
At the time of that article George Kukla and a group of paleo-oceanographers (the term climatologist wasn’t as common as it is now) were in the process of confirming the Milankovich hypothesis (project CLIMAP) that ice ages were caused primarily by changes in the earth’s orbital obliquity, tilt, and precession. Albedo was the control knob. Extrapolation of those parameters predicts decent into another glacial period. There was much less data available for analysis forty years ago and resolution in the time domain not much better than on a millennial scale. Deep-sea sediment cores rather then tree rings were a major source.
Alarmism is alarmism whatever the time period. Historical perspective ought to temper it, but rarely does. Even the most careful words of a researcher become cudgels in the hands of journalists.
Someone here recommended reading Climate of Hunger written in 1977. The book has graphs which show a temp decrease of .6C for the N. Hemisphere since the 1940’s. So if we accept the current charts showing a .6C or a little over .6C rise in N Hemi temp’s since 1977, then the N Hemisphere is right now about the same as it was in 1940.
And of course the Climate of Hunger book warns of the same natural disasters because of global cooling that in the present day we are told to be frightened of due to global warming.
This is the same scenario you find when you look at Hansen’s 1998 US temp data and append current US data through 2013. The US temp is about the same as it was in the 1940’s.
The point though is that there was global cooling consensus between 1972 and 1975 circa.
================
We studied global cooling in grade 11 or 12 social studies. I graduated class of ’69.
I have an old paperback first printed in 1977 titled “The weather conspiracy” the coming of the new ice age.
Its all there.
The over the top pure alarmism with wording identical to what the alarmists use today.
Only their talking about freezing your butt off.
Open the first page and the first paragraph gives you an idea of what’s inside.
“This vitally important document is compiled with expert testimony,scientific studies,government inquiry and the growing body of data in the field. It’s purpose is to inform the public of the true facts about a topic often clouded by fiction,superstition and alarmist misrepresentation.”
Scared the begeezus out me back then but who would have known that within a few short years I’d be out of the fridge and into the frying pan.
Some of the chapter titles are just as over the top as now.
“Climate-The last great mystery” or the “Upside down green house.”
But I especially like chapter 9 for its unadulterated pure alarmism.
“Take your chances-Some scenerios for survival”.
Yes and scientist’s are wondering why I’m a skeptic.
omnologos says:
March 13, 2014 at 2:19 am
“The point though is that there was global cooling consensus between 1972 and 1975 . . . ”
my bold
To arrive at that consensus an on-line survey was done of thousands of published and creditable . . . etc. . . . and 97% agreed etc., etc.
Actually, there IS documentation that there was NOT a consensus then just as there is not a general agreement now. TIME magazine and others of the popular press, then like now, reported on the we-are-all-doomed stories.
Well, that helps establish Lamont-Doherty as the Center for Man Made This and Man Made That.
One more to add to the over 100 media stories I have compiled,
1970s Global Cooling Alarmism
It all just sounds to familiar in an opposite kinda way.
For a discussion of the weather patterns expected during and a forecast for the timing and amount of the coming cooling see
.http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/2013/07/skillful-so-far-thirty-year-climate.html
Hold on, what’s this? Scientists talking about global cooling in the 70-ties and articles, even meetings, about it are a figment of the mind of us skeptics. Everybody knows that (claim the warmists) also in those days global warming was the hot topic of the day.
Just that you know.
‘Climate Science’ is fun to watch. It’s like watching dietary fads in slow motion. If fact, ‘Climate Science’ has a lot in common with ‘Nutritional Science’ in that they both seem to rely more on untested supposition, buzzwords and fads than they do on science. Only the life cycle of the buzzwords are a bit longer. In ‘Nutritional Science’ you can expect most any theory (or fad) to be either falsified or reversed in around 4 to 5 years. In climate science it takes from 30 to 40 years. You just have to be a bit more patient.
Well there could be a very simple explanation to it all with the missing heat moving in and out of the really, really deep oceans-
http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/ringwoodite-discovery-vast-ocean-hiding-beneath-earths-surface/story-fnjwvztl-1226853417746?from=public_rss
Now don’t be sceptical as this could be the missing link to our ancestors’ understanding of Big Climate- ‘Stonehinge!’
And while we’re on the topic of the times, whatever became of Eric Von Daniken? Nostradamus win the battle of peer review or some such?
Geez, does this mean that warming and cooling cycles are cyclical? Maybe every 30 years or so? Don’t ya wish there were temperature data from previous years so we could know for certain.
We must act then!
That is very interesting because that is also how they end. What an odd way to define natural climate variability.
In my analysis of the Milankovitch cycles – those cycles that control the major episodes of the glacials and interglacials – extremes in climate/weather are a good sign for these occur during the interglacials. It is when the world’s overall climate tends towards the static is the condition wherein those hundred thousand year glacial episodes take hold.
“This outlook, based on all available evidence from the last millenium, commits us to intensified research on climate which is now under preparation within the framework of the Global Atmospheric Research Program (GARP) and its sub-programmes….”
Now I think you’re really beginning to put some pieces of the 1970s climate puzzle together there Jimbo. Well spotted. Of course it was ‘The World According to GARP’ back then.
ferdberple says:
March 13, 2014 at 6:52 am
================
We studied global cooling in grade 11 or 12 social studies. I graduated class of ’69.
______
I hope your school balanced that by teaching comparative political systems in your physics class.
Another interesting point showing the bizarre world of alarmists: They can use the exact same arguments to tell us how opposite claims are true, with nary a pause to consider the fallacies they accept.
It might be useful to put up a resource page documenting the global cooling alarm, in case you run out of things to do.
What is needed is a site for all the climate warming articles where they can be cataloged and searched by topic and date.
Is there such a thing? It should be user-edited where anyone can add material as it is found.
I would love to help with a project such as that.
Here’s Kukla in Gelf in 2006: http://www.gelfmagazine.com/archives/an_unrepentant_prognosticator.php
–AGF
The rhythm of the ice ages makes it clear that there is going to be another in the future. The warning shots in the 1970s were laid upon legitimate concern. Those that have “profited” from the global warming scam undoubtedly believe in the coming ice age. You need the ability to acquire the ability to survive such periods, and that, in general, is supplied by wealth. No, the individuals will not survive the ice age, but their lineage will.
The opportunity that the highly active Sun gave them to manufacture wealth through the warming scam was fortuitous for them. It would never have been offered to them by the continuation of the obvious plunge towards an ice age that seems now to be beginning to assert itself. In fact, when you factor in the chemtrailing that supposedly is increasing the cooling effect, you can see that they are prepared to ride out the coming deep freeze, but are in a hurry to bring it on, along with the forced reduction of the human population.
The ruse of global warming is to keep more people from preparing to survive the coming deep freeze. Only real cooperation between people could bring a human population of billions through what is coming, and that is not being allowed. That is one of the reasons that so many countries seem to be in political turmoil – a nation and its population in turmoil can not prepare for the lack of space to grow natural food by finding innovative ways to create nutritional food substitutes, for example, and technology to survive in a cold climate. I will admit one thing – I cannot fathom the cold-bloodedness that would be necessary to willing allow billions to die of hunger and cold, just so I could live the life of luxury during my lifetime – not when well spent research could allow us all to live.
Science at its best : a study starting in ’71, ending in ’74, quoted by a Canberra paper (’twas just a village then…).
Some good science on climate came out of the 1970s. Dr Libby & Pandolfi published the most accurate and longest running climate prediction so far. I’m hoping they are wrong about what happens next (1-2 degree F drop & possibly 3-4) but they’ve been correct for 3+ decades so I’m getting ready for cold.
Coldest 6 month span..(Oct-Mar)..since 1912. Does this mean anything?
Just curious. What did these “scientists” recommend as a way to counteract global cooling? CO2? Or did want a more efficient greenhouse gas?
Folks, we have not been keeping records for a long enough period to discern a trend either up or down.
As I’ve always understood it (high school physics only), weather is mostly the result of the differences in temperature between one location and another and the resulting flow of air and the mixing of it between them.
Thus extreme temperatures would logically cause higher gradients than more tepid temperatures. Unless the entire globe became more homogenous temperature wise. And as the physics of the earth’s orbit, axial tilt and spin make this almost impossible to achieve, it will always have violent weather at times, somewhere.
The weather is not a system that lends itself to easy and simple analysis. We are talking about a sphere over 7,000 miles in diameter with a surface area of 196.9 million sq miles to cool and warm and with geological intrusions along with a massive amount of water to deflect, funnel the air and saturate it with water vapor. It will always be a chaotic system, difficult to predict.
JimS
You are bang on the money when you say that for a ice age to form there needs to be static weather patterns in place. lts for this reason that l think the Polar jet stream moved south and went zonal over a large part of the NH during the ice age. This winter has given me a big clue as to how a change in the weather patterns could make this happen. Because it looks to me that it is current strong and fairly stable Azores high is what is key to prevent this from happening between the USA and central Russia.
Could the reality be that our climate is catastrophically static?
I remember the talk about global cooling. One year in the later 1970’s the lower Hudson River near New York City completely (or almost completely) froze over.
I say that in 1972 we were at the height of global warming, where the speed of warming was at its highest. However, in those days we had many of those idiots in France and England and the USA who actually thought that it was OK to explode atomic bombs in the pacific. Hence, the man made global cooling around that time. (look at the destruction of pacific islands). We only see the biosphere going much greener in the past 3-4 decades (as observed from the satellites).
I also say that in 2016 we will be at the point where the speed of natural global cooling will be at its highest.We can only hope that there will not be another ice age.
Either way, there are ways for man to avoid the ice age trap if it comes.
Joe Crawford suggested: “In ‘Nutritional Science’ you can expect most any theory (or fad) to be either falsified or reversed in around 4 to 5 years. In climate science it takes from 30 to 40 years. You just have to be a bit more patient.”
But you’ve left out the singular *government* sponsored nutritional movement that has indeed lasted decades: the single bullet dietary cholesterol theory of heart disease in which the Michael Mann of his day, Ancel Keys, noted that arterial plaques were solidified by oxidized/polymerized cholesterol, a perfectly natural biological cell membrane stiffener, and then used cherry picked population studies to declare (directly to congressmen) his big discovery minus any real biochemical evidence which itself quickly debunked his claim to utterly no effect as the resulting upsidedown Food Pyramid led to sugar laced stealth candy on supermarket shelves for generations. Only lately with Internet exposure have afrw official medical organization even started to backtrack after four decades of readily disproven toxic advice. But boy were those BMW driving MDs condescendingly confident in their declarations, nearly every last one of them.
@taxed
Thanks for your feedback.
@Larry Geary
“Could the reality be that our climate is catastrophically static?”
At the moment it is not, but in the next few thousand years, it will slide into this “catastrophically static” state.
The only Milankovitch cycle that is holding the next glaciation episode at bay is the obliquity or tilt of the earth. Within the next few thousand years, obliquity will bring us into the “bottom end” of the cycle wherein the seasonal extremes will become noticeably less. It is quite possible that we will think, “Hey, this is nice – more moderate weather is growing worldwide – utopia is arriving.”
However, the default state of the earth in this 2.8 million year Ice Age we live in is an earth with large continental glaciers in both North American and Eurasia. For about 90% of the time for the last 2.8 millions years, this has been the state of our global climate. For the other 10% of the time, the earth has enjoyed these short warm interglacial episodes, one of which we are now living within – the temperate zones – mid-latitude zones – experiencing extreme seasons and extraordinary weather events.
Calder on Kukla here: http://calderup.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/next-ice-age/
When the next 100,000 year glaciation episode comes, and it will for in the past million years, we have had nine of them, we will not have ourselves to blame. That is the good news. The bad news is, it won’t matter that much because our civilization will more than likely collapse and disappear for a few thousand years.
Larry Greary @
The weather pattern that has given the USA its bitter winter this year. Was just of the type that would of turned up during the last ice age. The clue to this is the large extent of the ice sheets over North America but rather little over NE Russia. But lucky for us here in europe the Azores high blocked the jet stream from going zonal over the Atlantic when it pushed to the south down across the USA.
And its this that l think is a key difference between the weather patterns we have now and the one’s that happened in the ice age. At present we have a strong and stable Azores high sitting in the North Atlantic, but back in the the ice age l suspect there was not.
JimS @
As long as we have a waving Polar jet then things in the NH are likely to get no worse then it was in the LIA.
As a waving Polar jet limits the area where the cold weather can extend.
Gary says: March 13, 2014 at 6:43 am
“Alarmism is alarmism whatever the time period.”
Indeed. It seems there’s always some kind of human induced climate problem that we have to be anxious about. I rather like the one below from the 1880s. Donna Laframboise summarises from a news article of the time (note the words ‘cannot be a doubt’ within the article) :-
The concern back then involved the effect an expanding telegraph system might have on – you guessed it – the climate. The article says that if there were “sufficient electrical connection by wires around the earth” with the Earth itself, the planet’s polarity could be reversed. The result would be a “sudden melting of the vast ice fields” followed by a “glacial flood” that would wipe out the human race. The article continues: “Of course, tremendous earthquakes would follow…Whether this theory prove [sic] correct or not, there cannot be a doubt that something has of late gone wrong with atmospherical arrangements, and perhaps the telegraph wires are not wholly blameless in the matter.”
Leigh says: March 13, 2014 at 6:54 am
“This vitally important document is compiled with expert testimony,scientific studies,government inquiry and the growing body of data in the field. It’s purpose is to inform the public of the true facts about a topic often clouded by fiction,superstition and alarmist misrepresentation.”
And just like this article not one “Computer Model” being used to predict/project the outcome. This cannot be a real study without the use of models.
Besides HADCUT4 clearly shows the mid 70’s were the coldest time since 1957?
Thank you for this post. I remember the movement vividly. Freezing seemed like a plausible scenario in Finland, until practically snowless winters during 1972-1975, that is.
Repeating the experience, even in reverse, is too much to bear. Confidence in publicly funded awareness campaigns can soon be rounded to zero with the accuracy of four numbers, a bit like the hypothesis founding them.
Yet, I do have a fear: The longer this every passing day more obvious BS lingers on, the wider this societal distrust expands to the supporting structures. It may power the popularity of movements offering resistance as a solution. But how can that be good news? We need someone influential to snap out of it. Hopefully Ban Ki-moon before he experiences with the United Nations what Seán Lester had to face with the League of Nations.
In reply to Ed Zuiderwijk.
Ed back in the seventys the global warmists had a different name chiselled into the millstone around their necks
They were called “hot earth men”.
So what happened next, after these dramatic fluctuations of +/- 0.15 °C about the mean of the more or less flat period 1956-1976?
http://static.berkeleyearth.org/graphics/land-and-ocean/land-and-ocean-sea-ice-comparison-1950-large.png
Oh, right.
…….and the same tired old lefty reporters, Hull, Waterford and Warden, all surviving staff cuts….the only bright note is when my letters appear 🙂
Of course, now, 40 years on, we have infinitely more sophisticated Climate Models………
(—-)
The National Science Board predicted human-caused Global Cooling in 1974, see http://tvpclub.blogspot.com/2009/12/national-science-board-prediction.html for a link to their report.
Direct quotes:
1- “Human activity may be involved on an even broader scale in changing the global climate.”
2- “During the last 20-30 years, world temperature has fallen …”
3- “… there is increasing concern that man himself may be implicated, not only in the recent cooling trend but also in the warming temperatures …
4- “… activities of the expanding human population – especially those involved with the burning of fossil fuels – raised the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere, which acts as a ‘greenhouse’ …”
5- “But simulataneously … growing industrialization and the spread of agriculture introduced increasing quantities of dust into the atmosphere which reduced the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth. … the cooling effect of the dust particles more than compensated for the warming effect of the carbon dioxide, and world temperature began to fall.”
6- “Several consequences [of colder temperatures] have been observed: … southward intrusion of sea-ice … unusually large numbers of severe storms … development of a calamitous drought belt extending around the world …”
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME.
Ira Glickstein